Wednesday, May 18, 2011

The Marine Corps Heritage Foundation has dedicated a window in the Semper Fidelis Memorial Chapel at the National Museum of the Marine Corps in Triangle, Va, to Servant of God Vincent Capodanno.

Capodanno was a Maryknoll priest and chaplain serving the Marine Corps in Vietnam when was killed on the battlefield giving last rites to injured and dying soldiers. His Cause for Canonization was opened by the Military Archdiocese in 2002 and in 2006 he was decreed Servant of God. Father Capodanno is the only chaplain in service to the Marines to have received the Medal of Honor.

Each window in the Memorial Chapel is “titled with a word that describes the ethos of the Marine Corps.” It is fitting then that they chose to honor Father Capodanno with the “Sacrifice” window. The gentleman standing at the window is Father Capodanno’s brother, Marine Cpl. James Capodanno.

Triangle, Va. (May 13, 2011) – The Marine Corps Heritage Foundation dedicated the “Sacrifice Window” in the Semper Fidelis Memorial Chapel at the National Museum of the Marine Corps on May 11 to honor Chaplain Vincent Capodanno. The Foundation established the permanent tribute in Chaplain Capodanno’s name in recognition of his dedicated service to Marines and the ultimate sacrifice he made in Vietnam, in an effort to save a Marine’s life. The private ceremony at the Chapel remembered Chaplain Capodanno for his unwavering support of Marines in combat and his deserved recognition as the only chaplain to receive the Medal of Honor for service in the Marine Corps.

Chaplain Capodanno was ordained a priest after attending the Maryknoll Missionary Seminary. Maryknoll, a religious order that conducts overseas mission work on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States, took Chaplain Capodanno to Taiwan and Hong Kong to educate the local people and share his faith. In 1965, following his service abroad, Chaplain Capodanno asked to be reassigned to serve as a United States Navy Chaplain. After being commissioned a lieutenant with the Naval Reserves, he deployed to Vietnam in 1966 with the 1st Battalion, 7th Marines, 1st Marine Division. In December of that year, he reported as battalion chaplain to the 1st Medical Battalion, 1st Marine Division. In 1967, Chaplain Capodanno was assigned to the 3d Battalion, 5th Marines, 1st Marine Division.

“The Marines who served with Chaplain Capodanno remember him as the Chaplain who went wherever his Marines needed his comfort and guidance, no matter the personal danger. From the foxholes to the frontlines, Chaplain Capodanno was there,” said LtGen Ron Christmas, president and CEO of the Marine Corps Heritage Foundation. “Chaplains serve a tremendously important role in our military. They help our service men and women absorb the emotional toll of war. I do not think we could dedicate the “Sacrifice Window” to anyone more fitting than a devoted Chaplain who ultimately gave his life in service to his fellow Marines.”

On September 4, 1967, while serving with the 5th Marines, Chaplain Capodanno learned 2d Platoon, Company M was engaged in a violent battle in Quang Tin Province, resulting in many U.S. casualties. Chaplain Capodanno volunteered to work his way through the battlefield to administer last rites and provide aid to his Marines. Fred Smith, chairman, president and CEO of FedEx Corporation, served with Chaplain Capodanno and recounted during the ceremony how the Chaplain nearly lost his hand to shrapnel as he tended to the wounded, but refused care so that medical supplies could go to his injured Marines. As the battle raged, Chaplain Capodanno moved to the side of a grievously wounded corpsman. As he sought to administer aid, he placed his own body between the wounded man and an enemy machine gunner. Sadly, he lost his life to enemy fire.

Each window in the Semper Fidelis Memorial Chapel is titled with a word that describes the ethos of the Marine Corps. The Foundation dedicated the “Sacrifice Window” to forever remember the service of Chaplain Capodanno. In 2006, the Roman Catholic Church also provided an enduring honor to the Chaplain, declaring him a Servant of God, the first step towards canonization.

About the Marine Corps Heritage Foundation:

Dedicated to the preservation and promotion of Marine Corps history, the Marine Corps Heritage Foundation was established in 1979 as a non-profit 501(c) (3) organization. The Foundation supports the historical programs of the Marine Corps in ways not possible through government funds, providing grants and scholarships for research and the renovation, restoration and commissioning of historical Marine Corps artifacts and landmarks. Securing the necessary funding for the complete construction of the National Museum of the Marine Corps and Heritage Center is the Foundation’s current primary mission while continuing to provide program support for the Corps’ historical, museum, and educational activities.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Last September, Bishop Finn was elected President of the Institute for Religious Life, succeeding Rockford Bishop Thomas Doran who had served as president since 1998. IRL was founded in 1974 when the late Fr. John A. Hardon, SJ received permission from the Sacred Congregation for Religious in Rome to enlist bishops, religious superiors and lay people to form a group which would:

affirm the vocation to consecrated life in accordance with the authentic teaching of the Church, and of the Holy Father; promote authentic religious/consecrated life as set forth by Vatican II and their implementation by the Holy See; and to encourage vocations to the religious, consecrated and priestly life.

IRL’s first meeting was at Kansas City’s Rockhurst University in 1975 and they are now headquartered in Illinois. Unfortunately, we were unable to attend or cover IRL’s first meeting with Bishop Finn as president, last month, but he preserved his homily and it’s a good one:

Homily at the National Meeting Institute on Religious Life Divine Mercy Sunday - April 30, 2011 – Mundelein, IL Most Reverend Robert W. Finn Bishop of Kansas City-St. Joseph

Dear Brother bishops, priests, and deacons, Consecrated men and women, Participants and friends all in Christ,

It is a special joy and privilege for me to greet you at our National Meeting. I thank you for your love for Religious Life, for your dedication to the Church and zeal for the work of evangelization. These days we have enjoyed wonderful insights on the tremendous challenge of preaching the message of Truth and Life in Jesus Christ, using every means at our disposal so that no one will be lost; so that every human heart will hear the gospel; that it may resonate in hearts that long for the Redeemer.

We continue to celebrate the joy of Easter, the hope that is ours in the Risen Savior. Again and again His message in many appearances after the Resurrection is ‘Peace!” “My peace be with you.” And His word is efficacious. He wishes us peace, and His Word brings peace. He establishes peace in those who encounter Him. And He bids us be ambassadors of that saving Word, instruments of His peace.

This Holy Mass of the Second Sunday of Easter, Sunday in the Octave of Easter, was given an additional name by Pope John Paul II: Throughout the Universal Church it is Divine Mercy Sunday. How vital it is that we receive and, in turn, spread this message of Trust in Jesus, of Peace. In the midst of every trial and dark day, Jesus I trust in You.

This is a particularly important Divine Mercy Sunday. Tomorrow Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI, will proclaim Pope John Paul II “Blessed;” Blessed John Paul! We cannot fail to include in our reflection tonight, on the vigil of the beatification, some thoughts on this holy apostle who, as Pope, walked us through the door of the Third Christian Millennium. He announced the New Evangelization. He became the best known person in the world – in part because of the new media. He invited us again and again to contemplate the face of Christ. He charged us “Duc in Altum:” Put out into the Deep. He saw and helped us see the dawning of a New Springtime of Christianity. He echoed for us as Christ’s own Vicar, the encouragement, “Do Not be Afraid.”

These words, “Do Not Be Afraid,” were among the first I myself heard from the Pope’s mouth. I had the privilege as a student – then a young man recently ordained a deacon – to be under the window that night in St. Peter’s Square when Karol Wotyla was presented to the world. Instantly I became a “John Paul youth;” and in some ways I still think of myself as a John Paul youth.

I also recall the first time I ever heard of Divine Mercy Sunday – long before it was officially placed on the Universal Calendar. I was a young priest and I was asked by some parishioners to come to church on the Sunday afternoon after Easter to hear confessions. Hear Confessions?! I am thinking to myself, I have just heard confessions for hours and hours during Lent and Holy Week. Now we are going to hear some more – on a Sunday afternoon after Easter? I went – and I went back each year after. Slowly I began to let soak in this message of mercy. Eventually we would see it confirmed and verified by Pope John Paul; Blessed John Paul.

As clergy and Religious, consecrated men and women, and lay faithful, we know that the proclamation of the Gospel is the ground of our apostolic work. St. Paul asks, “But how can they believe if they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone to preach? And how can men preach unless they are sent?” Yes, people must hear. The truth will draw hearts. Jesus Christ, when He is lifted up, will draw us all to Himself. But we must lift Him up. We must go with the message, and more than words, the Living Word, Jesus. We must lift Him high; We must tell people about Him; and we must bring Him, in the flesh; Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, to others: to every human heart that longs for his and her Savior.

In a message to the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, (September 21, 2001) Pope John Paul acknowledged the zeal of the professed in this necessary work of the Church. “In the history of the Church,” the Pope said, “consecrated life has always been at the forefront of the work of evangelization.” He went on to suggest the deeply prayerful and personal nature of the mission. “It is necessary to present to young people the face of Christ contemplated in prayer and tenderly served in our brothers and sisters with selfless love.” The Holy Father seemed to know intuitively that this task would require creativity and a radical commitment. “We must be convinced,” He said, “that we shall not be saved by a formula but by a Person.” You and I must bring the Person of Jesus to others. “It is not enough for us to speak about Him; we must also make Him seen, with the bold witness of faith and charity.” (Ibid.)

The media can often be the hook. It is sometimes the place where people are already listening: on their hand-held, by text or tweet, in music and video, but make sure it is real and honest. The content of the Gospel is not clanging cymbal or noisy gong, but a Word of love. We must give each other the truth, because the living Word is what can change us, form us, renew us, feed us, strengthen us. Grace accomplishes everything, but in His strange Providence, He has wanted to use us as His “media,” His means and instruments for bringing the Good News. We want God to use us as apostles of the message of salvation. Music and light is not, of itself, sufficient. As participants in the life of grace, He can use us to hand on Jesus Christ.

In 1993, at the time of the Beatification of St. Faustina, Pope John Paul spoke to the Congregation of the Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy, Sr. Faustina’s Sisters, gathered in Rome. “Be apostles,” he told them, “By your word and your works, be apostles of the divine merciful love revealed to the highest degree in Jesus Christ.” The Pope said that this Mercy is a “fountain of life.” “It is a life,” he insisted, “different from that which human beings are in a position to build with their own strength.” By living mercy toward others; and this is inspired by God’s mercy to us, we have the privilege and responsibility of communicating something which has a supernatural value and effect. The media and the means may be human – but the content must be supernatural.

There are so many reasons for us to be joyful today, this Easter day: It is the Day of Mercy. We sense God’s invitation and call and we are strengthened by new vocations, a new springtime in the Church. Our Holy Father Pope Benedict teaches with such extraordinary perseverance and clarity. Blessed John Paul is soon held up before us as a model for our life and work. It is Easter and the Lord of Life is in our midst. His Word is peace and He bids us be apostles of Mercy. Alleluia!

I pray that the encounters we have had these days and the insights we have shared and received will bear fruit in a new evangelization. We will ask Mary, our joyful queen and mother, to be our guiding star, keeping us close to her Son and preparing for us a safe path in the work ahead. Amen.

Friday, May 13, 2011

UPDATE - On the basis of the Chronicles article discussed below and a quote from Fr. Neuhaus gleaned from wiki, I fashioned a quick and wantonly false idea about the nature of the publication. I have it on good authority (Mark Shea) that this impression is incorrect. I apologize unreservedly to Mr. Scott Richert, the other editors of Chronicles and its readers for the slanderous depiction of the publication that appears in this post.

Of course, I stand by the criticism of the article itself.

John Zmirak had a post yesterday at the new Crisis Magazine equating amnesty for illegal aliens with abortion, in so far as it can be expected that amnestied illegals would vote overwhelmingly for Democrats. The equation is so lock-tight in Zmirak’s mind, that his post was titled ‘Amnesty Equals Abortion’.

Not by implication does he say that those who support amnesty are necessarily not pro-life:

I would never leave such a statement to mere implication. I wish to say it outright: Those who favor amnesty for illegal immigrants are not, in cold fact, pro-life. That goes for politicians and voters, bishops and priests, men, women, and children, red and yellow, black and white.

It would be a risible accusation if it applied to any actual person, but since nobody is suggesting amnesty, in the Ronald Reagan sense that the term came to be known, I suppose no harm done. Even our pro-post-natal-murder President is not suggesting a Ronald Reagan type amnesty, nor is the inarguably pro-life Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles.

But Zmirak has a flexible definition of amnesty. In an offline, fringe nativist publication called ‘Chronicles’, he described the very modest DREAM Act as “an open-ended amnesty to illegal aliens who were brought here as children by their parents.” So, not by implication, but directly, Zmirak accuses every single Catholic bishop in the United States who, without dissent, supported the DREAM Act as “not, in cold fact, pro-life.”

Such people may be pro-life in theory, as thousands of antebellum Southerners claimed to be inward abolitionists.

As a DREAM Act supporter, I suppose it accuses me of being “not, in cold fact, pro-life”. So, when I founded a pro-life club in my liberal Catholic high school with no faculty sponsor, collected a string of arrests for blockading abortion clinics across the country, canonically sued my liberal Catholic college for forcing the student union to support a pro-choice group – and got kicked out, ran numerous pro-life campaigns in California, battled squishy priests and chancery rats as editor of the diocesan paper in San Francisco and volunteered at a myriad of direct pro-life ministries over almost every decade of my life, I was merely collecting social capital in Pelosiville. I collected so much social capital in my San Francisco of five generations that I now live in Kansas City. (Thank God!, btw)

Mother Teresa would not meet Zmirak’s pro-life test. But I suppose that’s conjecture – We cannot know for certain whether Mother Teresa would have supported sending the children of illegal immigrants, who know no other country than the U.S., to a homeless existence in a foreign country – a necessary qualification for being pro-life in Zmirak’s world.

We do know, however, what he thought of Blessed John Paul II. Well you don’t know, because you don’t read nativist rags published behind pay-walls. I’ve only read Chronicles, a publication deemed racist and anti-Semitic by the late, great Rev. Richard John Neuhaus, because a crank sent it to our offices to demonstrate the perfidy of Bishop Finn in supporting the DREAM Act.

In the February, 2011 issue of Chronicles, Zmirak wrote:

When the generally admirable Pope John Paul II made the silliest statement of his pontificate – calling on Americans to welcome at once the immigrant at our border and the child in the womb – people were puzzled. It doesn’t take a course in Thomistic ethics to lay out how absurd that non sequitur was. . . Not Pope John Paul’s finest hour.

But the Blessed Holy Father was not then making any species of argument subject to Zmirak’s deconstruction. He was making a pastoral admonition as Vicar of Christ.

Zmirak was less kind to the Blessed John Paul recently when while contemplating the latter’s faults, “now brutally illuminated by the fires of purgation,” Zmirak unreservedly recommended “A long and detailed, soberly written and argued brief against his beatification” appearing in The Remnant which concluded:

For the sake of truth we must be frank in stating the obvious conclusion: No blessed or sainted Pope in Church history has a legacy as troubling as that of John Paul II, and perhaps no Pope at all aside from Paul VI.

But back to the central subject of Zmirak’s ire in the Chronicles article – Bishop Robert Finn. Now, if any of you browse the pages of NCR, Commonweal, America, etc., you’d know that Bishop Finn is a subject of derision nearly without equal among the Catholic left, precisely for his repeated insistence that Catholics must vote pro-life first and foremost, even in consideration of their eternal soul.

But Zmirak has Finn in the Bernardin camp. Finn’s sin? He supported the DREAM Act and wrote to Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) to urge her support. Zmirak writes:

What tickles my irony bone is the tangle of moral inconsistencies men like Bishop Finn encounter when they dip their pink, uncallused fingers into politics.

Rich from a guy whose job description is “Writer in Residence at Thomas More College”. Zmirak continues to complain that Bishop Finn’s letter

was written to a politician whose positions on abortion and stem-cell research are so out of line with Christian morality that Senator McCaskill was prevented from speaking in 2007 at a Catholic high school in St. Louis – on the orders of then-Archbishop Raymond Burke.

And? It is just possible Bishop Finn is aware of these facts. He is from St. Louis and he and Cardinal Burke are friends (Burke also supports immigration reform and has said “we obey the command of Our Lord, who tells us that when we welcome the stranger, we welcome Christ Himself.”) None of this precludes Bishop Finn from writing a letter to McCaskill urging her support for the DREAM Act. In fact, in his letter, Bishop Finn specifically asked McCaskill to vote against the DREAM Act if it becomes attached to any provision for abortion in military hospitals or repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (as it previously had been).

Even this due diligence on Bishop Finn’s part comes in for ridicule - “Finn was forced to mention the life issue,” Zmirak sneers. He continues:

Typically, men like Finn are engaged in soldering together unrelated affinities. In doing so they have followed the example of Chicago’s old cardinal Joseph Bernardin in promoting a “seamless garment” of concern for the “weak” and the “vulnerable” – embracing all the fetishes of modern liberalism, except for those ruled out explicitly by authoritative statements from Rome – then trying to insert unborn children in the victim list.

This is such an absolutely distorted and slanderous depiction of one of the most admired pro-life leaders in the episcopacy that it must be considered when judging the seriousness of Zmirak’s argument in “Amnesty is Abortion”. That article does not say anything important about the issue of abortion. As a friend wrote to me, “You could just as easily make the argument that ‘Hispanisteria Equals Abortion,’ since you're driving a huge voting bloc into the arms of the Democrats.” What the article does demonstrate – by defining men like Bishop Finn, Cardinal Burke, Archbishop Chaput, Cardinal George, Archbishop Gomez, and anyone else who supports immigration reform as being “not, in cold fact, pro-life” – is the terrible lengths to which John Zmirak will go to demagogue on immigration.

We shouldn’t take for granted the little spark of genius necessary for making Water for Elephants look like it takes place in the circus world of the 1930s. The sundry references to the Depression are to a certain degree superfluous. The design team did an excellent job of re-creating the world of circus magic, as well as the texture and costumes of that decade, and of making the two things distinguishable, yet united. Perhaps they overdid it with the loud, chichi outfits of maniacal circus owner August Rosenbluth (Christopher Waltz), but, after all, he is a maniacal circus owner.

Hal Holbrook plays a 90-plus year-old retirement home escapee and veteran of the circus named Jacob Jankowski, who narrates the story at the beginning and end of the film. From the present day we travel back to the 1930s to see him (now played by Robert Pattinson) as a hopeful and fresh-faced senior at Cornell University, about to pass his final exams and earn his license as a veterinarian. But before this all-but certain triumph, tragedy rips away any sense of purpose he had in life. He runs away from Cornell without getting his degree. His plan is to travel to the next city and try to find a job.

Instead, on a desperate whim, he decides to jump (illegally) onto a passing train and, as destiny would have it, he jumps right onto Mr. Rosenbluth’s Benzini Brothers traveling circus train. Circuses during the Depression did not make a lot of money, and leeches were not treated kindly. But Jacob was also lucky to jump onto the right car in the train. Mr. Erwin (John Ayleward), a lowly by respected longtime member of the circus, takes him under his wing and finds him a job. Jacob’s skills as a veterinarian, once they are discovered by the Benzini Brothers’ owner, August Rosenbluth, allow him to become a prominent member of the circus team, and in no time, Jacob starts receiving frequent invitations to the fancy dinners that the lowly clowns and “roustabouts” never get to enjoy.

Jacob has a difficult time in the circus, however, because he can’t go against his nagging conscience. First, when Rosenbluth asks him to examine an abscess on the foot of his star-attraction white horse, Jacob tells him the honest, professional truth: there is nothing to do for this horse but to put him down and end his suffering. When Rosenbluth tells him—in perhaps the best couple of lines in the film—that any man who cares too much about the suffering of animals “has not seen very many men suffer,” Jacob ignores him and secretly euthanizes the horse himself. He is almost tossed out of the circus (and train) after doing this, but Rosenbluth has mercy on him. And he also needs Jacob to tame and train his new attraction, which would replace the dead horse: a large elephant named Rosie.

While training Rosie, Jacob has to work closely with a woman he had already fallen in love with on first sight, but who is also already taken. Marlena (Reese Witherspoon) is a beautiful woman, a talented circus entertainer, and not bad at making a show with Rosie the elephant. Unfortunately, she is married to August. August, however, we soon discover to be abusive and tyrannical to his wife, the circus animals, and the roustabouts. Jacob’s struggle to decide what to do about all this will be the spark for the end of the movie.

The end of the movie is also very strange. Rosie the elephant, of course, is a main attraction, and the funny tricks she can do are one of the reasons why people will go to see the movie. But Rosie is also a wild animal. What is strange is the way that Marlena and Jacob are able to ignore and overcome the chaotic elements that are placed within the movie itself, all in plain sight. There are animals unhappily caged, some of them frightening. There is foreboding even in the roar of a toothless lion. Rosie herself is not so easily domesticated, mostly because you can’t fully domesticate an elephant. The specter of uncontrollable nature is all around. Beyond that, the exploitation of the roustabouts and other lowly workers of the circus, in the hands of the well-coiffed August, is real and brutal. They appear to have a quite good case for revolution, and they are, like the caged animals, unhappy. But when they do revolt, the result is not glory, but the death of innocent people.

These interesting conflicts are left unresolved; they are background staging for a love story. Somehow Jacob and Marlena manage to survive the chaos, and not to be affected psychically (and only a little physically) by the violence around them. It’s as if their story were merely superimposed on the grimy backdrop full of suffering. For this reason, the story feels contrived, even magical. At one point, even Rosie herself develops a moral conscience and spectacularly comes to Marlene’s aid.

Its as if there are two movies in one: an interesting one in the background, about tyranny, exploitation, revolt, and poverty, and a feel-good, distracting one in the foreground, with a talented elephant as an almost extra-cinematic attraction.

Monday, May 9, 2011

“We remain committed to actively promoting vocations to the current celibate male priesthood,” the now-removed Toowoomba Bishop William Morris wrote after he indicated, “we may well need to be much more open towards other options for ensuring that Eucharist may be celebrated.”

Sound like he was more interested in “other options” rather than encouraging legitimate vocations to the priesthood? Let’s look.

If you visit the website of the Diocese of Toowoomba hoping to explore a call to the priesthood, you will find there are eight main navigation buttons on the site. If you click the “Ministry” button, you’ll get a drop-down menu with four new categories to choose from. Not sure which one to click? Click “Pastoral” and you’ll get another drop-down menu with eleven new choices. Listed after options for:

You will finally see the option for “Vocations”. For all your effort and brilliance in counter-intuitive web navigation, you’ll be rewarded with this rousing pitch:

Where is your life going? Are you feeling unsettled, bored, disappointed with your life so far?

Maybe the Catholic Priesthood is for you! God may be calling you to follow him as an ordained priest or as a religious brother or sister! Have you ever seriously considered the Priesthood or Religious Life as being a viable option for you?

Full Stop. A few boring notes on process follow, but that’s the end of the pitch. There are no links, no pictures, no seminarian profiles, no vocation stories, no priest testimonials, no letter from the bishop, no resources for discerning a call, no prayers, not even an email – just a phone number and a message that boils down to “Depressed? Call us.”

Now, certainly, a website does not represent the full force of a diocesan vocation effort. Our vocation team members – beginning with the bishop – spend their time in the field, magnifying their own efforts by helping to create and sustain a “culture of vocations,” and consequently, we currently have 25 seminarians.

There is a reason why some dioceses have many seminarians, while others have none. It is not the intransigence of Rome on the question of ordaining women.